Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Michael Torpey, a Clifford Chance partner in San Francisco, said he might as well be operating a printing press when it comes to the ruling in a recent win for client Intel Corp. The ruling said “not for citation” across the top, but that didn’t stop securities lawyers from flooding Torpey with requests for copies. In the July 28 ruling, San Jose-based U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel tossed out a securities class action with prejudice. The case, filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, was In re Intel Corp. Securities Litigation, 01-20888. In the suit, investors accused Intel of making false statements about its revenue projections and some of its products to inflate the company’s stock price. The case also blamed Intel for laudatory statements made by an analyst. Intel had made one previous motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint. When the judge ruled on that motion in October, he gave the plaintiffs leave to amend. Not so this time around. “As with the first amended consolidated complaint, plaintiffs’ allegations fail to establish that the alleged false and misleading statements at issue were made with the requisite state of mind,” Fogel wrote. Though the ruling is unpublished, securities defense lawyers are looking for ways to use it to their benefit in pending matters, Torpey said. He said he has some 30 cases that may benefit from the ruling. For Torpey, the victory was hard-fought because judges seem increasingly leery of ending such litigation because of the recent corporate scandals. “There’s a movement against granting motions to dismiss,” Torpey said. Rulings like the one in the Intel case are “hard to come by, especially in this environment.” Despite the win, the 51-year-old Torpey is taking it in stride. “When you get to be my age, it’s good to have a win,” he said. “It’s better than losing, but it’s not as exciting as it used to be.” He left the elation to the other members of his team, partner James Lico, who wrote many of the briefs, and associates Amy Ross and Guy Ladetzky. Lico got the news the day before he was to begin his annual family vacation. It was during same getaway trip last year that he wrote some of the briefs in the Intel case. “It was extremely satisfying,” Lico said through a crackling cell phone in the Santa Inez Valley in Southern California. “It gives me bandwidth right now” to enjoy the vacation.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]

Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.